FS#12199 - pacman: --ignore should work recursive or give a warning

Attached to Project: Pacman
Opened by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Friday, 21 November 2008, 14:31 GMT
Last edited by Xavier (shining) - Friday, 17 July 2009, 22:10 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category General
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 3.2.1
Due in Version 3.3.0
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 2
Private No

Details

Description:
If I use the --ignore flag of pacman for e.g. kernel26 because I do not want / cannot reboot the host at the moment (servers etc.), I now get an error for e.g. the nvidia module that cannot be updated because of unsatisfied dependencies and I have to add it to --ignore and so on. In this case it is clear that the unsatisfied dependency is kernel26 I asked not to upgrade. In my opinion, nvidia should be ignored automatically together with the kernel26 package instead of demanding the user to list every package separately in the ignore list. A warning that the package is ignored to would suffice.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Xavier (shining)
Friday, 17 July 2009, 22:10 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Additional comments about closing:  should be implemented in 3.3.
reopen if not.
Comment by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Friday, 21 November 2008, 14:43 GMT
ow... Should be Packages:core of course... sorry
Comment by Nagy Gabor (combo) - Monday, 24 November 2008, 14:04 GMT
Theoretically, unsatisfied dependencies can be resolved with at least two method:
1. Adding a new (satisfier) package to the target list. I.e. trying to accomplish user's wish.
2. Removing a package from the target list (which has unsatisfied dependency). Maybe, fall-back from 1.
(In case of removal, we have -Rc (~1.) and -Ru (~2.))

I can only support a general solution for 2. (like -Ru), not a recursive --ignore.

I like the current logic of --ignore, it simply hides some sync packages. And -Su is equivalent with -S <outdated_pkgs>, so the current behavior is correct imho. (However, I know that adding nvidia manually to IgnorePkg is not very comfortable.)
Comment by Erwin Van de Velde (evdvelde) - Monday, 24 November 2008, 14:16 GMT
Okay, -Su means updating all outdated packages, but since you already explicitly asked to ignore some packages, why not give a warning that your ignore list blocks some other updates as well, instead of giving an error? There is not a huge difference in semantics, but there is one in usuability.
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Saturday, 06 December 2008, 01:00 GMT
I also find the current version annoying, I'd much rather it done in the style evdvelde proposes.
Comment by Xavier (shining) - Monday, 25 May 2009, 11:33 GMT
Does this work in pacman 3.3 git after the fix for  FS#9395  ?

Loading...